Rosenthal on Angels, Qualifying Offers, Drew, Jays, Putz

The Angels are likely to eclipse the $189MM luxury-tax threshold eventually, despite their efforts to avoid doing so this offseason, Fox Sports' Ken Rosenthal writes. Sources tell the columnist that the Angels have between $13MM and $15MM of space left beneath the cap, figures that are much lower than what will be required to sign Masahiro Tanaka. However, extending Mike Trout at, say, $300MM over 10 years would make it difficult to avoid surpassing the threshold anyway, so the Angels may as well do so now, Rosenthal surmises. Here's more from his new column:

This offseason's big contracts for less-than-durable stars like Jacoby Ellsbury, Curtis Grandersonand Brian McCann show that position players can earn more as free agents than they would with club-friendly, long-term deals. Meanwhile, clubs appear increasingly willing to move players who resist extensions. For example, sources tell Rosenthal that rival teams have asked about Astros catcher Jason Castro, who could be moved if Houston is unable to ink him long-term.

Qualifying offers appear to have suppressed the market for players such as Nelson Cruz and Kendrys Morales, frustrating player representatives. Potential fixes to the system include guaranteeing that free agents receive a qualifying offer only once, or ensuring that teams signing free agents who received qualifying offers lose only draft picks and not their associated bonus-pool amounts. The current system will remain in place for another two offseasons, Rosenthal notes.

Stephen Drew appears to be a fit for the Mets, rival executives say, despite the club's insistence that it will consider Ruben Tejada for its starting shortstop job.

The Blue Jays remain among the favorites to sign either Ervin Santana or Ubaldo Jimenez, despite their quiet offseason thus far. The Jays could acquire as many as two starters before the offseason is over, Rosenthal reports. In addition to upgrading through free agency, the club has also discussed trades for the Cubs' Jeff Samardzija and other starters.

The Diamondbacks could trade J.J. Putz after acquiring Addison Reed from the White Sox. Swapping the righty for Yankees outfielder Ichiro Suzuki is one potential deal, or Putz could be packaged with other players in a deal for a starter such as Yovani Gallardo of the Brewers.

Comments

You know, there was draft pick compensation before the QO. People talk like the loss of a pick is something new, but there used to be more Type A Free Agents than players who refused a QO.

Sometimes I think teams are just using the draft pick as an excuse to their fans for not spending money. Its not like a pick in the mid teens and 20’s is a sure thing, its still pretty much a lottery and the bonus pool loss affects the ability to sign later round picks which are even more of a lottery.

The system definitely needs to be changed, and in fact never should have been agreed to by the MLBPA in the first place.

I agree with you that it’s not the pick, but you’re wrong about it not being about the money. In the past, there was no limit on what teams could pay their drafts, meaning teams would draft and sign good players later in the draft. Player who could be encouraged with a higher signing bonus.

This happens even now, as teams will punt picks by adding guys who will sign below slot to give them some flexibility in signing these tougher to sign picks. The pool money is a huge detriment to these players offered a QO.

I do like the suggestion teams lose their pick but still get to keep the pool money. Would allow teams to compensate for free agency, while not hurting the players as much.

The process has changed a lot.
Under the Old System
Type A Free Agents: The team that lost a FA got 2 picks (the other teams plus a sandwich pick) Creating extra picks.
Type B Free Agents: The losing team got a sandwich pick, that didn’t cost the signing team anything. Again, creating extra picks.
Also, When a signing team lost a pick, the comp picks were off-limits. So frequently teams lost 2nd and even 3rd rounders, while still retaining 1st rd and sandwich picks. Don’t forget Type B players that may have been offered arbitration such as Hughes, Chamberlain or Logan.

For example, Yankees this year won’t draft until middle of the 2nd round. Under the old system, they would’ve gotten a Seattle 2nd and a sandwich for Cano. Mets 2nd and a sandwich for Granderson. Ellsbury, McCann and Beltran would’ve costed Yankees 1st, 2nd, 3rd rounders. Plus assume 2 comp picks for Hughes and Logan.

Currently Yankees drafting 56 and 92
If this were the old system they’d be drafting 48, 49 50, 51, 65, 71 (roughly).
Big difference.

Why does it need to change? The problem is that the mid teir players who receive offers should accept. The guys sitting out there now would probably looking at 3/30 kind of deals. They were offered north of 14. Accept a deal that is well above your aav. There are so many less players offered these deals than there used to be under the previous system.

Excellent point.
I have to question the point of the draft pick compensation in the first place, however long it has been in play.
It makes sense in terms of equalling the playing field for smaller market teams who lose their homegrown talent all the time to the larger market teams who can outbid them. But when a team from a small market city tries to compete by signing a big name, they have to more at risk with the money in terms of getting a return and also have to consider a much higher draft pick- because for the most part small market teams are rarely contenders.

The Draft pick compensation system is completely different. Gone are the days when you could accumulate extra picks through compensation, so the picks lost are much more valuable.

For example NY Yankees:
Under the current system, they offered QOs to Granderson and Cano and signed Ellsbury, Beltran and McCann (so far). Their first pick is middle of 2nd round.
Under the old abritration system they would most likely offered arbitration to Granderson, Cano, Hughes, Logan (maybe Chamberlain, arbitration for RP was cheap). Cano and Granderson would be Type A, Hughes and Logan would be Type B. This would net them 4 sandwich picks after the first round, plus Seattle and NY Mets 2nd round picks, while losing their own 1st, 2nd and 3rd.

Again: 4 picks under the old system, before their 1st pick in the new system. Then 2 more before the next pick. Completely different, you can’t summarize it by saying they lost picks under the old AO and new QO systems, as if they are relatively equal. It ignores entirely the extra picks accumulated that don’t exist anymore. So teams value those high picks much more.

i think the simplest change with the most potential impact is to prohibit QOs in consecutive years. Players might be willing to accept the offers if they know that freedom is just a year away and rich teams might be less willing to offer such deals hoping for compensation picks if they fear that the QO will be accepted for one year only.
If Kuroda wants to go until the age of 50, will we have to witness him on the QO list year after year?

Many times it’s Boras people that are left holding the bag late in the off season. Either they don’t/won’t take early offers when given the opportunity (Cardinals) like when Drew would have been better suited for that stadium by pretty much anyone’s estimate to play there over Peralta and then his habit off off hand flat out turning down arbitration/qualifying options for players, regardless of the market/type of player he is supposed to be looking out for 1st.

he has cost major dollars to fringe players in Jason Varitek this way, Kendrys Morales probably so ans well as probably shortly Drew. Yes.. Drew may end up shaking a 2y deal out of someone, but the AAV probably isn’t going to be near 14m and I’m going to be shocked to see Morales get more than 1y at 8-10m.

Taking his top players to the market and declining arbitration is fine, but his fringy players? boras has got to take his medicine on and learn to take their best interests 1st rather than his ego..

The Cardinals were never interested in Drew in part due to him being left-handed which would have given STL an all left-handed infield. If you think the Cards struggled against lefties last year, imagine a lineup where 6-8 batters are left-handed, that wouldn’t be pretty.

Don’t forget Kyle Lohse, Boras client, who declined 14mil QO last year, only to sign very late for 3/33mil. He would’ve made three mil more in ’13, and would’ve been sitting pretty in this years market.

QO was 13.3 million in 2012, so he actually got 19.7 million more in guaranteed money which is what he wanted in the first place. He was looking for a long term deal instead of a one year payday. Kind of like Vargas this year, he was offered more money per year in a 3 year deal from the Angels but instead opted for a lower per year deal for 4 years with the Royals….

I highly doubt a team is paying paying drew or morales 14 million a year when attached to giving up a pick, i don’t even expect them to get a multi year deal. So the total contract they receive is likely going to be less than the QO they could have accepted. That was my point, but who knows maybe a desperate team will give them a 2 year deal, stranger things have happened I guess.

Ehh..less than a hit per inning and more than a strikeout per inning = great but also a pitcher who tends to give up a lot of fly balls which could/would translate into home runs. Still, I would do it as a Yankee fan. We’re not going to get a great player in exchange for Ichiro. It’s a spare part for spare part kind of deal we’re looking at here so yeah, Putz would be fine.

Putz has generally done a good job of keeping the HR/9 down with Arizona, and they play in a hitters park as well. He did see a jump last year, but he also had a 14.8% HR/FB ratio, so a normalization there would probably be in order. Honestly, if Cashman can get Putz for Ichiro, that would be a win for us.

Okay, on the Diamondbacks note… umm… why in the WORLD would the Brewers even WANT J.J. Putz, much less as part of a deal for Gallardo? I could see us trading Gallardo, but there is no logic in wasting part of that deal on Putz. We have relievers, and we have a closer. I mean, unless I’m missing something, there just isn’t a reason for Putz to be a in a deal like that with the Brewers.

your not, especially after acquiring will smith, who may be in the pen. further, I gotta believe melvin just has to hold onto gallardo at this point and hope he rebounds into what he was on the trade market, rather than move him for cents on the dollar

I came to the comments just to say about the same thing. Let’s see, Brewers likely non-contenders trade deadline sellers. Who could net them more in trade at deadline? Putz or Gallardo? That alone make the idea bad. and having traded away Davidson and Skaggs who else does Ari have that helps Milwaukee long term? Nobody left that fits the makeup of the team….I mean Bradley is untouchable in this rant thought.

I think eventually the market will correct itself. The teams that overpay for players will have reduced flexibility in future- and can spend less, which might drive costs down in future years (union might complain about collusion, but teams will be legitimately tapped this time- and this is coming from someone who thinks the owners would collude if they could)

QO’s pretty much establish a floor for premium FA’s should the market collapse.

I do think the folks who are going to suffer are mid-tier and below veterans in the current system, they’ll become undervalued

Why would the Indians do that deal? They don’t need a catcher and is McCarthy really an up-grade over what they have? Plus, Santana is one of their middle of the order hitters, young switch-hitter with power. I don’t know why they would want to replace that with Montero when they have Yan Gomes to catch.

Why would the Diamondbacks want Ichiro? Their outfield is already crowded with Trumbo, Pollock, Parra, and Ross. Although the only one I’m comfortable with is Trumbo… But you want someone that’s an upgrade over all of them, Ichiro isn’t better than any if them

Greinke was going to the highest bidder and the Dodgers with their new ownership and new 7 billion dollar TV deal in hand were not going to be outbid by their crosstown rivals …. but that being said the money they spent on Hamilton, Blanton and Hanson ( 36 mil AAV ) should have gone towards 2 top line starting pitchers like Anibel Sanchez, Francisco Liriano, Hiroki Kuroda, even a Kyle Lohse type of guy would have worked ,,,, this in turn would have prevented the Angels from having to trade Trumbo and even Bourjos to pick up other pieces…..

Probably should’ve added those starters but if Arte wasn’t so rigid over the luxury tax, he would’ve gone after everyone on your list in addition to Hamilton. That’s what he should’ve done considering how depleted their farm system is. The Angels are in a similar position that the Yankees put themselves in, but didn’t take that extra step in payroll to stay competitive. As far as Bourjos, him being traded was also inevitable. They needed a better 3B than Callaspo all along. That’s a trade they probably make regardless.

Angels really had no need for Hamilton, they already had a lower cost Hamilton in Trumbo who is club controlled for 3 more years and could play outfield and 1st base as well. Bourjos when healthy is one of the best defensive CF’s in the game and other than a couple of freak pitches that broke a bone in his wrist would of made up one of the best outfield defenses in baseball with Trout in left and Trumbo or Calhoun in RF. They would have had plenty of cash to find a suitable 3rd baseman for 2014. With the penalties coming in 2016 with the revenue sharing plan not to many teams want to be over the Luxury tax cap for 2 consecutive years or more unlike the Yankees and Dodgers who can just print money with their revenue streams and TV deals….

The Angels have the second highest yearly revenue from their new TV deal alone, nearly twice as much as the Yankees. The Dodgers, Angels, and Rangers are the top 3. The Angels can print money just as much as the Dodgers, but Arte has “chosen” to stay under the luxury tax. And that was a bad choice. That’s the point here. Going over the luxury tax is inevitable. Arte should’ve just gone all the way instead of putting on the breaks with cheap pitching options. Bourjos was never going to be the Angels’ everyday CF and David Freese is a fine addition. Not very many 3B options out there. The Angels did need Hamilton. They need as much star power as they can put in the middle of their lineup to compete in the LA/OC market. That’s why high market teams sign those players, even if they don’t need them. It fuels revenue. Fans, including Arte Moreno, need to stop thinking like the Angels are still a mid market team and thinking how they can scrap for pennies. The Angels are in a position to go all out, in part because of their depleted farm system, and it looks like Arte will be forces to do so after trying not to. I think Arte will finally come to terms with this, and we’ll soon see the Angels will be spending and loading up like the Yankees and Dodgers.

Sure the Angels got a new TV deal for an AAV of 150 mil per year but it started in 2013 and I believe it has a 3% to 4% rise each year until 2032 so for 2013 it would be about 110 million and ending in 2032 with 190 million in it’s final year. The Dodgers new deal is 320 million AAV and the Yankees is 90 mill plus 35% profit in Yes TV which is a multi billion dollar business. The Yankees revenue was 471 million in 2012, Dodgers was 245 mil, for a bankrupt team that nobody went and watched, the Angels 239 mil and lost 13 million on the year. The final numbers are not in yet for 2013 but the Dodgers led the league in attendance in 2013 new ownership, own their stadium and parking and everything they sell in the stadium. Angels lease their 48 year old stadium and share everything they sell with the city of Anaheim including parking and concessions. Just how are the Angels going to print money??? Do you even know how the new revenue sharing program works in 2016??? The Angels were 7th in team revenue in 2012 and with 60 million in new TV money for 2013 will still be behind the Yankees, Dodgers and Red Sox by quite a large margin…..

As far as Bourjos goes he was the everyday CF until he had his wrist broken on a pitch. It never healed completely in 2013 but every time he took the field he was in CF. In every defensive metric in baseball Bourjos is a far superior defender than Trout. Freeze is a terrible defender at 3rd base, has a bad back and unless he is the Freeze of 2011 and the first half of 2012 this trade will come back to haunt the Angels for several years.

Star power, come on they have the best player in the universe with Trout, the best player in the last decade with Pujols, one of the most exciting home run hitting ( Trumbombs ) cost controlled players in baseball with Trumbo along with Weaver before getting hurt last year was a top 5 CY Young pitcher the past 3 years….

The QO should have to be a multi-year commitment. Doing so would limit the players who receive offers to only the truly elite worthy of compensation. It might not be a perfect solution but I think it would an improvement on the current system.

I think if one or two of these players do end up waiting until June to sign there would be a lot of teams looking to change the system. Imagine a contending team adding a Drew or Santana in the middle of the season.

Another way would be to have the QO stay on the table longer and the the draft pick penalty to come off in the middle of spring training. A player has 10 days to decide on whether to take it or not yet the pick penalty is attached all the way to draft day. Teams would be far less likely to offer a QO if they knew come that a player can test the market and then comeback and take the QO..

Dbacks need another outfielder.this isnt last year.we have 3 outfielders.then ross who is may not be ready.not sure if tony c can even make the team.ichiro would be great for a.j against tough right handers.he would bring speed and a above average arm who can come in for d in the ninth when trumbo has to play d.ichiro and parra no one is running

The Diamondbacks have Parra/Pollock/Trumbo to begin the season. Supposedly (though I still doubt it) Ross will be ready as well. THat’s 4 outfielders already. Then they also have Prado, who plays LF rather capably as well should anything happen to two of the current crop of outfielders.

As much as Ichiro might have intrigued me 2 years ago, he simply doesn’t bring anything to the team the Diamondbacks need, except possibly a whopping $1 MM in savings, which is essentially nothing in the grand scheme of things.

That makes total sense. He figures to make $35-$40 mil over the next 4 years, and then giving him $30 mil a year for the 6 years beyond that makes sense. No player makes $30 mil a year; he’d be wise to take a deal like that while his value is high. But the Angels won’t want to do that, with the AAV system of calculating the luxury tax. On one side, it will benefit them on the back end of the contract, but with $50 mil a year (nearly) committed to Hamilton and Pujols over the next 4 years, I can’t see the Angels wanting to raise Trout’s AAV by $15 mil a year during Hamilton’s contract.

Actually there is speculation that Trout will be offered a long term contract after the start of the 2014 season so as to not be included in the 2013 luxury tax total. With over 30 million and possibly more coming off the payroll after 2013 ( Wells, Blanton, Ibanez, Burnett ) the Angels will have some money to work with. Cron backing up 1st base and DH in 2015 and possibly Cowart taking over at 3rd base as well will lower the payroll further….as far as Trout’s contract in size and years it’s anyone’s guess….

I’m assuming Trout makes around $40MM ($10MM, $13MM, $17MM) for his arbitration years, then you give him an AAV of $24.285MM per season, because the final year or some year that makes sense based on future obligations, he’d “only” make $20MM again. That would seem reasonable because it’d be in line with what arbitration figures would most likely end at and be essentially at market value with a very reasonable number of FA years committed to on both sides. I.E. Angels aren’t stuck if/when he gets too old to produce at the same level (ala Hamilton and Pujols) while Trout can go out and get another desperate team to overpay him for his declining years. It’s a win-win all around.

Not really sure about those arbitration numbers. Trout would probably seek around 12 to 13 million in his first year of arbitration if he has another year like the last 2. If Pujols comes back and is just good ( .285, .360, .550 ) they won’t be able to walk Trout 110 times batting in front of him. I would say somewhere between 8 to 10 years at 23 mil to 25 mil AAV will get it done…..

I can’t believe that for once people think I am being too conservative on a contract estimation. You really think he can get $13MM his first year of arbitration? That means he’d end up with around $51-54MM just for his arbitration years, then assuming a $24MM AAV on an extension, that’s more like a 10 years/$225MM overall deal. OR, if he goes through arbitration, hits F.A. and gets a 10 year contract, that’d essentially be a 13 year/$300MM commitment. That’s INSANE for the Angels, even if it’s just about perfect for Trout.

The progressive nature of the luxury tax means that you shouldn’t go over now because you know you will in the future. In fact knowing that you will eventually go over is a good reason not to do so now.

The QO system is flawed but it does work. Each year there are a couple players who gamble and don’t do as well as expected. Notice I did not say they lose becaseu getting market value versus being overpaid is not losing, Here is something i noticed of the players that are left in limbo, (for the lack of a better word) the common theme is they are typically players not worthy of a QO in the first place so they should have accepted. The second is the majority are Boras clients.Maybe the agent needs to change his ways for his clients. Last year Lohse and Bourn, this year Drew and Morales all clients of the same agent. PS- I do not count Cruz in any equation since he is asking for 75 mil.

The question really is what the underlying rationale for the QO is and does the policy do anything important to meet that goal. If the idea is to compensate the team for losing a great player, you could manage that simply by giving them a sandwich pick without the signing team losing the pick (and slot money.) But if the real idea is to act as a deterrent; to punish the signing team and act as a drag on salaries, well this system only works part way. It clearly does not act as a deterrent for the top tier players. Is it “fair” that Kendry Morales and Nelson Cruz have to wait? Well, they were both players with issues who made a choice to reject the QO. Nevertheless, I think that the once a career QO and age cutoffs make sense. But net/net, I think the system actually serves to push up salaries. Strip the biggest revenue teams of picks, and potentially they have to pay even more for free agents because they can’t develop them fast enough in their own systems.

100% correct. A player off a PED suspension should know when he rejects a QO that he’s rolling the dice. And Kendry Morales, a decent but unspectacular offensive player and defensively mediocre – he should have taken the QO for sure.

The current QO system is fine. The reason these guys are making such ridiculous salaries is because baseball has not put in a salary cap or built any type of revenue sharing that would be a spending deterrent. In a country with millions still out of work, it’s insulting to hear that player reps are “frustrated” because they decided against accepting a $14 million QO. Give me a break.

John, I’m as frustrated as you are with billionaires facing off against millionaires, but the players have talents that the market values. And, let’s be honest–if right now the players agreed to a salary cap, the end of guaranteed contracts, etc. ticket prices wouldn’t go down a dollar. Nor would your cable bill. Nor would the owners stop going back to the taxpayers for free stadiums, tax breaks, subsidized financing, infrastructure, etc. In a country with millions out of work and basic services being cut back (schools, fire, sanitation) it’s even more insulting that team owners have to stick their hands in our pockets.

I thought the same thing until I read an article yesterday. Starting in 2016 the revenue sharing plan changes and is why the Yankees are trying to get under the Luxury tax cap. Every team puts in 31% of the years revenues into a pot and then they divide the pot into 30 shares with each team getting an equal share. Starting in 2016 any team that has gone over the Luxury tax for 2 years or more gets fined 25% for 2 consecutive years over the tax, 50% for 3 years, 75% for 4 years, 100% for 5 years. So the Yankees who had 471 million in revenue in 2012 would put in 146 million dollars and get back approximately 70 million in 2013 but would get nothing back in 2016 with the new system and the 70 million goes back into the pool for the rest of the qualified teams to share.

Im still confused why everyone thinks that the Mets want Drew so badly. They’re a year away yet from contending with Harvey gone for the year, and Drew’s more of a complementary piece than a guy who lifts your team. His D did mean a lot to the Sox last year, but Napoli and Victorino were much bigger additions.

We are at the point in free agency where the players available aren’t nearly worth what they think they are going to get in salary. Remember Santana’s agent talking over 100 million, he and Jiminez, Garza types are not getting 100 million. Drew is looking for a 3 year contract while everyone only wants to give him 2. There is a big difference playing for the Mets next year and the Sox.

We are at the point in free agency where the players available aren’t nearly worth what they think they are going to get in salary. Remember Santana’s agent talking over 100 million, he and Jiminez, Garza types are not getting 100 million. Drew is looking for a 3 year contract while everyone only wants to give him 2. There is a big difference playing for the Mets next year and the Sox.

Or trade Putz back to Seattle Mariners to reunite w/ Bloomquist as they need a closer in exchange for Tom Wilhelmsen or Brandon Maurer, Carson Smith, Julio Morban or Stefan Romero, and Jesus Montero to back up at first base if related to catcher Miguel. Putz’s QO will be an improvement in the Pacific NW after pulling off the trade should Towers and Jack Z can work out the deal, esp. some players not mentioned here to be dealt instead of the ones posted.